What really angers the Roman Catholic Church heirarchy

American Papist ^ | January 28, 2008 | Thomas Peters

[NYer]

Amid news that, in preparation for Brazil's Carnival celebrations, the government will be handing out millions of free condoms, Reuters indulges in some editorializing:

Recife city also plans to distribute morning-after contraceptive pills -- a move that has angered the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy.

The church opposes Brazil's much lauded anti-AIDS campaign on the grounds that it promotes contraception.

Wait a minute. How exactly does the morning-after pill prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS? That's right, it does not. Therefore, the distrubtion of morning-after pills can in no way be taken as being part of an "anti-AIDS campaign."

Furthermore, the church does not oppose anti-AIDS campaigns "on the grounds that it promotes contraception." This is a woefully inadequate account of the Church's position. The quotation from Bp. Duarte sheds some light on the situation:

"... while the church was not against people having fun in Carnival, the morning-after pill and condom campaign "will only serve to diminish inhibitions and encourage orgiastic behavior."

... and that's just a start. After all, the President of Brazil (whom the article notes, is known as a"gregarious character" who "enjoys a drink") has been on the radio asking people to not go overboard, and "His dour warning appeared to be partly prompted by a rise in deaths and accidents from drunken driving during the Christmas holidays."

So, to review: when the President tells people to behave more responsibly while simultaneously distributes condoms, it's a wonderful government innitiative. When a Catholic Bishop speaks out and notes how giving people the means towards a bad end does not help the situation, he's out to lunch.

It's going to be a long Lent.

[NYer]

Final week to put away the Christmas decorations :-)

[tortdog]

>Wait a minute. How exactly does the morning-after pill prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS? That’s right, it does not.

Good point!

[RobbyS]

More to the point, how much does the condom help prevent the spread of the HIV virus? I guess marginally is better than none, but nothing beats fear of intercourse.

[ducdriver]

I see...it only angers the “hierarchy”, and not the faithful?

[Salvation]

They are speaking for me too.

[verga]

More to the point, how much does the condom help prevent the spread of the HIV virus? I guess marginally is better than none, but nothing beats fear of intercourse.

The single best analogy I heard was that the becasue sperm is 450 times larger than the AIDS virus it was like using a tennis net to stop a bullet.

[RobbyS]

One comment I found illuminating: if the millions and millions of dollars that have been spent in dispersing condoms had been devoted to the establishment of basic health clinics, Africans would be much healthier. IAC, Malaria is a bigger threat to them than AIDs.

[D-fendr]

Especially considering that if you diagnose malaria symptoms as AIDs you get tons more bucks from Uncle Sam.

[verga]

One comment I found illuminating: if the millions and millions of dollars that have been spent in dispersing condoms had been devoted to the establishment of basic health clinics, Africans would be much healthier. IAC, Malaria is a bigger threat to them than AIDs.

Funny you should mention Malaria, I just started reading John Stossel's book "Everything you kew was wrong" and one of the first chapters he talks about DDT being used in Africa to kill the mosquito. He states that if used in the proper doses that it is perfectly safe for everyone. a light spraying on a hut will keep them safe for 6 months, but because of fear mongering the UN refuses to allow it to be used.

[RobbyS]

... because of fear mongering the UN refuses to allow it to be used. Don't know who to blame more, journalists who are swayed by superficial answers to complicated questions or politicians whose personal knowledge is limited to the knowing the best restaurants in Manhattan!